Harper promised lower taxes when he was elected. This isn't bribing tax payers, this is following through on campaign promises. Agree or disagree with the actions, but don't misrepresent what this actually is.

If people give more of a shit about the services than the taxes that fund them, they'll vote Harper out. But if they'd rather have the money than what Harper has cut (ie seemingly every environmental and science based job, along with a large chunk of veteran's benefits) they'll vote Conservative again.

Why is an article written in an Ontario newspaper, that references downtown Toronto repeatedly, posted in r/Vancouver? In fact, Vancouver has a 92 db limit on motorcycle noise, so this is a completely irrelevant article.

And the article has several flaws anyways.

Any facts he tries to portray come from "Jason, a motorcycle enthusiast in his 30s who some years ago crashed and suffered severe injuries and no longer bikes". Really? We're supposed to take a single name, with no credentials as a basis of information?

He also completely ignores the reason that many motorcyclists claim for using loud pipes. They're a safety feature. Motorbikes are smaller, and less visible than cars. Having someone change lanes when you're riding right beside them is a constant threat for motorcyclists. Louder pipes mean the person not properly shoulder checking is still going to know you're right beside them.

Those who think this is 'PC bullshit' from people with nothing better to do:

Would you be ok with a Nazis and Jews theme?
Slaves and slave owners?

I'm not saying that what natives went through is nearly as bad as these two groups, but at what point do you draw the line? It's a slippery slope, and I think these conversations need to be had more out in public. When the only defence for your side is 'this crap happened 50, 75, 100 years ago, get over it already', you may need to rethink your argument.

"Indians" may have been real people, but the fact that you use to term repeatedly while referring to aboriginals/natives without any hint of irony, shows the mindset that you approach the subject with.

I agree it won't look good, which is why the league should suspend Emery.

But the chances of the ref stepping in and making shit worse is very high. One person trying to control two people covered in goalie gear, with one of them throwing punches at whatever he can, is a recipe for disaster.

Indian isn't slang for indigenous. It refers to people from India, which is where Christopher Columbus thought he landed when he came to the Americas. By the time they realized otherwise, nobody gave a shit and the name stuck.

Take 10-15% of your gross pay, every pay cheque, and put it in low risk-low return investments, a high interest savings account, RRSPs, countless options. Do this for 35-40 years and you'll have a boatload of money at the end of it all.

My main point is more so that just because something is a mercury compound, doesn't mean it's toxic in any dose; there are different levels of toxicity for different compounds. Just like with different alcohol compounds.

Again, I know little to nothing about chemistry so I may still be wrong, but that's the way I'm looking at it.

They may not have done this from a minds of hate, but it does seem to come from a mindset of ignorance. I don't think the girls should be punished, but I do feel that situations like this are reasons to have bigger conversations about the historical and cultural significance behind doing something like this.

You say that dressing up like a black person and black face are different, which I agree with to a point. But are you saying dressing up like a specific black person, or just a black person in general? Because I'm assuming the former would involve some sort of hip hop attire, which would still be pretty racist.

But let's compare blackface to dressing up like an 'Indian'. What was the point of blackface? To ridicule and poke fun of black people in the early 1900's? (I'm not too sure of the time period). How were aboriginals/native Americans depicted in movies and tv, during the same timeframe? As brutal savages, uneducated villains who needed to be destroyed by the hero, a white cowboy; all while wearing exactly what these girls were wearing. It doesn't seem as far off when I frame it that way.

Just to be clear, I'm not saying that what these girls did is as bad as blackface, or that they should be punished at all really, but at what point do you draw the line? It's a slippery slope and we as a society should be using events like this to open up the discussion as to why many people consider this inappropriate behaviour.

Her problems have a very large impact who she is and her thought process throughout the entire ordeal. Not caring about her problems means you don't care about very important details that effect the whole situation.